ReviewAsia Pacific allergy2026
A systematic review of the outcomes of desensitization for delayed-type cutaneous adverse reactions induced by antituberculosis drugs.
Review in Asia Pacific allergy, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Tuberculosis remains a significant global health concern, affecting millions of people worldwide. Treatment usually involves a combination of drugs; however, drug hypersensitivity reactions pose challenges, particularly due to the diversity of side effects. Cutaneous reactions are common, ranging from maculopapular rash to severe conditions such as drug reaction with eosinophilia and systemic syndrome and Stevens-Johnson syndrome/toxic epidermal necrolysis syndrome. Rechallenge with the same drugs is often practiced, but desensitization has emerged as an alternative in the mitigation of reactions, especially in an outpatient setting. Methods: We conducted a systematic review in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines and searched PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and CINAHL databases. Studies were included if they involved patients with tuberculosis receiving rechallenge or desensitization, reported postdesensitization outcomes, and were published in English. Data extraction and analysis were independently performed by 2 reviewers. Results: The literature search identified 4,560 potentially eligible articles, of which 7 studies comprising 102 patients met the inclusion criteria. Desensitization success rates ranged from 78.9% to 100% with a range of protocols employed across studies. Investigations such as patch tests and lymphocyte transformation tests have helped in ensuring accurate diagnosis and guided desensitization strategies. Conclusion: Desensitization is an effective strategy for the management of adverse reactions to antituberculosis drugs, particularly in cases of delayed cutaneous adverse reactions.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.